PREPARING TRIAL AND APPLICATION BUNDLES: A LITIGATOR’S SURVIVAL GUIDE: WEBINAR 4th DECEMBER 2024
The previous post on Serra -v- Harvey [2024] EWHC 2250 (KB) has led to me finalising a (long-prepared) webinar on bundles. In Serra wasted costs were ordered on an indemnity basis against the claimant’s solicitors because the lateness and condition of the trial bundles. The bundles…
LATE AND “HAPHAZARD” SERVICE OF TRIAL BUNDLES LEADS TO WASTED COSTS ORDER AGAINST CLAIMANT’S SOLICITORS (ON THE INDEMNITY BASIS)
There are numerous cases on this blog about trial bundles. The issues never seem to end and have not been solved by the advent of the electronic bundle. This can be seen in the judgment of Deputy High Court Judge…
A TRIAL BUNDLE THAT WAS A “CHAOTIC MESS”; NON COMPLIANT WITNESS STATEMENTS AND EXPERT REPORTS AND “PROCEDURAL TRENCH WARFARE”
There are interesting procedural aspects in the judgment of Simon Gleeson in Carl v Hawkins & Ors [2024] EWHC 2186 (Ch). The case, about historic sports cars, involved (among other things) “procedural trench warfare”; highly defective bundles; non-compliant witness statements;…
“AN UNWIELDLY COLLECTION OF COURT DOCUMENTS”: A JUDGMENT THAT ENDS THE “BUNDLE DROUGHT”
It has been six months since this blog featured a complaint about trial bundles. That barren period is ended by some observations of Costs Judge Leonard in Griffin v Kleyman & Co Solicitors Ltd *[2024] EWHC 1151 (SCCO). The bundle…
“A COMPLETELY UNACCEPTABLE WAY OF PREPARING FOR AN IMPORTANT HEARING”: NON-COMPLIANT AND INCOMPLETE BUNDLES: WITNESS STATEMENTS IMPROPERLY PREPARED
The judgment of HHJ Pearce in Shobeiry v Patel [2023] EWHC 2549 (KB) shows how failing to comply with the rules can lead to major problems in relation to hearings. Here there was non-compliance with the rules relating to bundles,…
DELAYS, ADJOURNMENTS AND THE SIZE OF THE TRIAL BUNDLE: NOT JUST AN ACADEMIC PROBLEM: ELECTRONIC BUNDLES DOESN’T MEAN YOU CAN JUST THROW EVERYTHING IN
The judgment of Mr Justice Constable in Innovate Pharmaceuticals Ltd v University of Portsmouth Higher Education Corporation [2023] EWHC 2394 (TCC) contains another interesting insight into the preparation of trial bundles and how that, in itself, can become highly contentious. …
“E-MAIL EXCHANGES COULD BE 2,000 OR 4,000 PAGES APART”: A JUDGMENT ABOUT BUNDLES (WHERE YOU CAN SEE SOME FAIRLY GRUMPY CORRESPONDENCE)
In Bailey -v- Stonewall Equality Ltd, Garden Court Chambers & others the Employment Tribunal awarded £20,000 costs against the respondents (in what is normally a no- costs regime) because of the chaotic way that the application bundle had been presented. …
THE DANGERS OF ACCIDENTALLY DISCLOSING WITHOUT PREJUDICE OFFERS: THE TRIAL JUDGE WAS “HANDED A BOOBY-TRAPPED BUNDLE”
The judgment of Sir Jonathan Cohen in Koukash v Koukash [2022] EWHC 1001 (Fam) underlines the importance of keeping without prejudice offers out of the sight of the trial judge. A finding in a family case was overturned because one…
THE KING’S BENCH DIVISION GUIDE: THE NEW BITS (2): NAVIGATING THE PDF (OR NOT QUITE PRACTISING WHAT IS BEING PREACHED…))
One interesting thing about the new King’s Bench Division Guide is the anomaly that the page numbers it refers to in the index are not the page numbers on the PDF copy. Basically you have to add 12 to the…
HEARING AND TRIAL BUNDLES: ARE THE COSTS OF PREPARATION RECOVERABLE? WELL, YES THEY ARE (IN PART)
There was some discussion on Twitter earlier this evening as to whether the cost of preparing bundles is recoverable at all. Since we have not had a case featuring a judicial complaint about bundles for several months* and “bundle cases”…
SEDLEY’S LAWS IN THE MODERN AGE: ELECTRONIC BUNDLES “SOME OF THE PAGES MUST APPEAR UPSIDE DOWN, PREFERABLY AT SPORADIC INTERVALS”
The post yesterday on Sedley’s Laws of documents led to me to consider how this should be applied in the modern age. More specifically to electronic bundles. These musings led to contributions from the lawyers of Twitter. We clearly have…
BUNDLES: SEDLEY’S LAW REVISITED: HAS MUCH CHANGED OVER THE PAST NINE YEARS?
Nine years after it was first published I am re-visiting a very early post on this blog. Regular readers will know that the issue of trial and hearing bundles have featured regularly over the intervening period. It is not uncommon…
RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS REFUSED: TRIAL BUNDLES, LATE WITNESS STATEMENTS AND LATE DISCLOSURE: CASES NEED TO BE PREPARED PROPERLY
I am grateful to my colleague Eleanor Temple for sending me a copy of the decision of HHJ-Davis-White KC in the case of Ball -v- Ball (11th October 2022), a copy of the judgment is available here Ball v Ball…
APPEALS: POINTS OF LAW AND BUNDLES: LITIGANTS SHOWN THE YELLOW CARD: YOU CAN READ THE RULES HERE
In Banks v Blount [2022] EWHC 1491 (QB) Mr Justice Ritchie was critical of an appellant for failing to comply with two basic elements of the practice directions relating to appeals. The need for clarity and precision when referring to…
WHEN THE COURT LOOKS AT THE MERITS OF THE CASE IN A RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS APPLICATION: A RARE,BUT IMPORTANT, DEVELOPMENT
In Rapid Displays Inc & Anor v Ahkye & Anor [2022] EWHC 274 (Comm) HHJ Pearce (sitting as a judge of the High Court) refused the defendants’ application for relief from sanctions. That application was heard alongside the claimant’s application…
QUEEN’S BENCH DIVISION GUIDE 2022: LINK AND BUNDLES
The new Queen’s Bench Division Guide was published yesterday and is available here. THE CHANGES “Changes in the guide include: Interim and out of hours applications Urgent and Short Applications before the Masters Electronic bundles The procedure for issuing…
GLUTS AND BUNDLES: LOTS OF AUTHORITIES DON’T HELP: “THIS MUST NOT BE REPEATED IN ANY FUTURE COUNTY COURT TRIAL”
I am sure that our eminent housing bloggers and commentators will write about the important substantive judgment in the case of Rosebery Housing Association Ltd v Williams & Anor [2021] EW Misc 22 (CC). However this blog deals with only one…
“WHAT IS THE POINT OF HANDLING A CASE FOR A COUPLE OF YEARS AND THEN FAILING TO PRESENT IT WELL TO THE COURT?”
This may be one of the few blogs that has a category “Trial Bundles”, with dozens of posts on this topic. It remains one of the most searched and read subjects on this site. Here I am revisiting a useful…
MORE GUIDANCE ON E-BUNDLES (FROM THE FAMILY COURT): “NO PAGE SHOULD APPEAR UPSIDE DOWN”
The President of the Family Division has issued guidance on E-Bundles Sup-guidance-E-bundles. Many of the points made here can provide guidance to civil practitioners. “No page should appear upside down.” GUIDANCE ON E-BUNDLES FOR USE IN THE FAMILY COURT AND…
“IT IS NOT ACCEPTABLE ORAL ADVOCACY TO REDUCE WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS TO LITTLE MORE THAN A SERIES OF REFERENCES THAT A JUDGE CAN THEN LEFT TO FIND ACROSS A VAST BUNDLE”
The closing lines of the judgment of HHJ Pelling QC (sitting as a High Court judge) in Libyan Investment Authority v Credit Suisse International & Ors [2021] EWHC 2684 (Comm) highlight many issues in relation to civil advocacy. In particular…